CESTAT quashes Penalty imposed on failure to consider Non-Receipt of SCN by Firm or Partner [Read Order]
![CESTAT quashes Penalty imposed on failure to consider Non-Receipt of SCN by Firm or Partner [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/CESTAT-Penalty-SCN-TAXSCAN.jpg "CESTAT quashes Penalty imposed on failure to consider Non-Receipt of SCN by Firm or Partner [Read Order]")
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi Bench quashed penalty imposed on the appellant on the ground of failure to consider non-receipt of Show Cause Notice (SCN) by firm or partner. The appellant, Rajdhani Traders is a partnership firm having. The other appellant – Mr. Amit Rastogi is a partner of the firm. The case of Revenue is that these...
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi Bench quashed penalty imposed on the appellant on the ground of failure to consider non-receipt of Show Cause Notice (SCN) by firm or partner.
The appellant, Rajdhani Traders is a partnership firm having. The other appellant – Mr. Amit Rastogi is a partner of the firm. The case of Revenue is that these appellants have passed on inadmissible cenvat credit by issuing fake invoices without actual supply of goods.
The allegation against the appellant is set out in the SCN, that they in a planned manner in connivance with M/s.Star Delta Exim Pvt. Ltd. indulged in purchase and issuing of fake invoices, without supply of goods to Continental Engines Private Ltd. Thus, the appellant have contravened the provisions of Rule 4(1) read with 3(1) of CCR, 2004 and thus, appears to be liable for penalty under Rule 25 of CER 2002.
The Counsel for the appellant argued that during the relevant period under dispute, M/s. Start Delta Exim was in existence and duly registered with the Department and that the eevenue have erred in drawing adverse conclusions based on the statements without finding any fault or errors in the books of accounts and other manufacturing records maintained by the parties.
The Counsel further, urged that under the facts and circumstances, no penalty can be imposed on these appellants under Rule 25 and that in any case, no penalty is imposable on these appellants. Further, the show cause notice is time barred.
The Tribunal of Anil Choudhary, Judicial Member noted that” I find that the order of the Court below is vitiated as it has not decided the preliminary question or ground, that is non-receipt of the show cause notice by these appellants. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed by way of remand. The impugned order is set aside.”
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
